Take a photo of a barcode or cover
crispycritter's Reviews (516)
Almost made it to the 30% mark. Quality-wise this is reading like a C+ KU romance. Completely chaotic plot. Both characters pining after others, insta lust, no real chemistry. I like Marcela and it’s so refreshing to see some better representation in trad pub romance. Theo is giving nothing. Ben is a twat I can’t imagine pining after for 10+ years.
If one of y’all refers to this as a sports romance I will riot. The man is a RETIRED NFL player and we aren’t even told what position he plays.
If one of y’all refers to this as a sports romance I will riot. The man is a RETIRED NFL player and we aren’t even told what position he plays.
DNFing at the third Taylor Swift reference. Authors, the Venn Diagram of People Who Read Romance Novels and People Who Listen To Taylor Swift is not a circle. Please stop.
Maybe there’s some growth later, but 25% in this has got to be the most melodramatic and infantalizing representation of Hyperactive-Type ADHD I’ve ever read. It’s like Chamberlain read an online listicle about what it looks like in 13 year old boys and applied every single bullet point to a 27-year-old successful chef MMC. There’s something very inauthentic about it.
I really did not like the dynamic of how Ellie triggers Kieran’s feelings of shame and inadequacy. She reminds him of his shitty teachers and parents. Right off the bat. We are basing a relationship off this? She doesn’t even know him and she already doesn’t understand him. Imagine years down the road when the relationship is tough and maybe she’s feeling bitter and resentful because he’s scatterbrained or overwhelmed or slipped up on the house work. I just feel like she’d be the type of person to weaponize his neurodivergence against him. It ain’t gonna work. Sincerely, an inattentive ADHD reader who loves a hyperactive ADHD man.
To top it all off: I felt nothing for these two. Either as individuals or as a couple. When are we supposed to get some frickin chemistry? Some yearning? At 25% in shouldn’t we at least have some signals other than internal thoughts of oh, this person is hot? Observations of someone's physical attractiveness are such a weak way to build a romance. You always need this + more and there was no more.
Last - the POVs. One chapter we have 4 POV switches. We don’t need this. Pick one per chapter. It just strikes me as amateur, like you want to have your cake and eat it too by showing every little thing from the right character’s perspective. There’s even a typo where Ellie is supposedly explaining that Hank is her brother but whoops we are supposed to be in Kieran’s perspective and he says “I finally say with a sigh.” These quick switches didn’t add or illuminate anything important IMO that really mandated a POV switch.
I didn't make it this far, but other reviews indicate that Chamberlain engages in somecharacter assassination against the late husband. This is another amateur writing move - you don't need to make us DISLIKE the prior love interest for us to fully invest in the romance. It's okay for people to have pasts. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but it struck me as feeding into the stereotype in romance where it's okay for men to have romantic histories but not women - unless they were unhappy and we can discount them.
TL;DR I don’t believe you, Sarah Chamberlain.
Maybe there’s some growth later, but 25% in this has got to be the most melodramatic and infantalizing representation of Hyperactive-Type ADHD I’ve ever read. It’s like Chamberlain read an online listicle about what it looks like in 13 year old boys and applied every single bullet point to a 27-year-old successful chef MMC. There’s something very inauthentic about it.
I really did not like the dynamic of how Ellie triggers Kieran’s feelings of shame and inadequacy. She reminds him of his shitty teachers and parents. Right off the bat. We are basing a relationship off this? She doesn’t even know him and she already doesn’t understand him. Imagine years down the road when the relationship is tough and maybe she’s feeling bitter and resentful because he’s scatterbrained or overwhelmed or slipped up on the house work. I just feel like she’d be the type of person to weaponize his neurodivergence against him. It ain’t gonna work. Sincerely, an inattentive ADHD reader who loves a hyperactive ADHD man.
To top it all off: I felt nothing for these two. Either as individuals or as a couple. When are we supposed to get some frickin chemistry? Some yearning? At 25% in shouldn’t we at least have some signals other than internal thoughts of oh, this person is hot? Observations of someone's physical attractiveness are such a weak way to build a romance. You always need this + more and there was no more.
Last - the POVs. One chapter we have 4 POV switches. We don’t need this. Pick one per chapter. It just strikes me as amateur, like you want to have your cake and eat it too by showing every little thing from the right character’s perspective. There’s even a typo where Ellie is supposedly explaining that Hank is her brother but whoops we are supposed to be in Kieran’s perspective and he says “I finally say with a sigh.” These quick switches didn’t add or illuminate anything important IMO that really mandated a POV switch.
I didn't make it this far, but other reviews indicate that Chamberlain engages in some
TL;DR I don’t believe you, Sarah Chamberlain.
These legitimately keep getting better and better. TOP-TIER ANGST in this one. So much action. So much mystery! Either I was too dumb to figure out what was going on or the slow trickle of information and reveals was just well-written and satisfying. In either event, pip pip Cheerio! Curran: BE STILL MY HEART. ❤️
Loveable characters:
No
This book is incredibly difficult for me to rate. On the one hand, it was a very quick read and has some real good spice.
On the other hand, the whole miscommunication trope / catfishing situation was such a head scratcher. Why would you choose this storyline? Why would it go on for nearly 80% of the book, even after Daphne and Chrisare sleeping together ?
I genuinely like “unlikable” women and difficult FMCs but I just did not understand Daphne as a reader. There were so many illogical situations she tried to explain away that I just did not get. She was like a slightly more unlikable version of Phoebe from LITTOSK. Chris on the other hand was a beautiful character, which might be why this didn’t really work for me. Sam in LITTOSK was unseasoned boiled potatoes. Chris felt so much more developed and likable I dunno - I felt like he deserved better than Thompson’s usual awkward and mean FMCs? It’s not a great feeling when you’re actively rooting against the characters getting together. I felt like Chris deserved better.
I’ve also realized I have a tough time with divorced characters, or that they need to be handled with extra care. Maybe I’m too old and cynical, but if you have a character who is divorced and you’re not super clear on why the relationship didn’t work out, I’m gonna assume 1. It was at least partly your fault and 2. You’re destined to repeat this behavior absent affirmative evidence suggesting you’ve worked on yourself. Daphne just put her brother’s best friend on a pedestal. Marriage over. 😭😭😭 Okayyyy??? And we see her throughout the book be TERRIBLE at being honest and forthcoming with her feelings with Chris??? Ok girl. Give us nothing.
It’s also tough when there are so many OUTSTANDING baseball romances out there. I couldn’t help but compare this to books like The Prospects and We Could Be So Lucky. There was something a bit hollow about this book. It’s like Thompson enjoys going to games for the social aspect but I didn’t feel the deep love for the game like I do in, well, pretty much every written work about baseball. We get one Yogi Berra quote and zero examples for baseball being a metaphor for life.
On the other hand, the whole miscommunication trope / catfishing situation was such a head scratcher. Why would you choose this storyline? Why would it go on for nearly 80% of the book, even after Daphne and Chris
I genuinely like “unlikable” women and difficult FMCs but I just did not understand Daphne as a reader. There were so many illogical situations she tried to explain away that I just did not get. She was like a slightly more unlikable version of Phoebe from LITTOSK. Chris on the other hand was a beautiful character, which might be why this didn’t really work for me. Sam in LITTOSK was unseasoned boiled potatoes. Chris felt so much more developed and likable I dunno - I felt like he deserved better than Thompson’s usual awkward and mean FMCs? It’s not a great feeling when you’re actively rooting against the characters getting together. I felt like Chris deserved better.
I’ve also realized I have a tough time with divorced characters, or that they need to be handled with extra care. Maybe I’m too old and cynical, but if you have a character who is divorced and you’re not super clear on why the relationship didn’t work out, I’m gonna assume 1. It was at least partly your fault and 2. You’re destined to repeat this behavior absent affirmative evidence suggesting you’ve worked on yourself. Daphne just put her brother’s best friend on a pedestal. Marriage over. 😭😭😭 Okayyyy??? And we see her throughout the book be TERRIBLE at being honest and forthcoming with her feelings with Chris??? Ok girl. Give us nothing.
It’s also tough when there are so many OUTSTANDING baseball romances out there. I couldn’t help but compare this to books like The Prospects and We Could Be So Lucky. There was something a bit hollow about this book. It’s like Thompson enjoys going to games for the social aspect but I didn’t feel the deep love for the game like I do in, well, pretty much every written work about baseball. We get one Yogi Berra quote and zero examples for baseball being a metaphor for life.
hopeful
reflective
fast-paced
I don’t know how to express how much I love Joy Sullivan’s poetry other than to say I feel these poems in my bones. Forking excellent.
I checked this out from the library and once I returned it I immediately bought myself a copy so I’d be able to flip through this at will.
I checked this out from the library and once I returned it I immediately bought myself a copy so I’d be able to flip through this at will.
Man this book was a slow burn with little to no romantic groundwork still done at 70% of the way in. 🧐
If you like Resident Evil and Hellboy and are an incredibly patient person I suppose this book may work for you.
If you like Resident Evil and Hellboy and are an incredibly patient person I suppose this book may work for you.
It’s pretty distressing how relevant this book is still today. Are some parts a bit dated? Yeah. But most of it is not. Which is a hard thing to sit with.
bell hooks put into words one of my discomforts with what I see in 2025 pop culture feminism. It’s cute we’re all hyping each other up, decentering men, supporting women’s wrongs, etc etc. But feminism can’t succeed unless men change too. And feminism can’t succeed until women, many of whom (like myself) consider themselves to be feminists, notice and take accountability for the ways they have been perpetuating patriarchy. There’s a certain spiteful glibness I see from women online, relishing in the male loneliness epidemic, telling straight men in particular that they made their bed - it’s time to go lie in it, alone forever, and to suffer. I relate to these posts. I like these posts. But there were many moments in this book that made me really sit with how I’ve treated men in my life, particularly romantic partners, when they haven’t performed in ways I expected them to. It’s easy to point the finger at everyone else. It’s deeply unsettling to consider how deeply ingrained some of these expectations are in yourself, especially if you identify as a radical feminist like hooks.
TWTC doesn’t discount the violence men commit against women, children, and other less dominant men. It doesn’t ask women to do all the work for men. But it is full of important insights into how the patriarchy robs men of pieces of themselves and womens’ roles in upholding and reinforcing the patriarchy. This is a book of deep love and empathy for the good men out there. I think it’s worth a read.
bell hooks put into words one of my discomforts with what I see in 2025 pop culture feminism. It’s cute we’re all hyping each other up, decentering men, supporting women’s wrongs, etc etc. But feminism can’t succeed unless men change too. And feminism can’t succeed until women, many of whom (like myself) consider themselves to be feminists, notice and take accountability for the ways they have been perpetuating patriarchy. There’s a certain spiteful glibness I see from women online, relishing in the male loneliness epidemic, telling straight men in particular that they made their bed - it’s time to go lie in it, alone forever, and to suffer. I relate to these posts. I like these posts. But there were many moments in this book that made me really sit with how I’ve treated men in my life, particularly romantic partners, when they haven’t performed in ways I expected them to. It’s easy to point the finger at everyone else. It’s deeply unsettling to consider how deeply ingrained some of these expectations are in yourself, especially if you identify as a radical feminist like hooks.
TWTC doesn’t discount the violence men commit against women, children, and other less dominant men. It doesn’t ask women to do all the work for men. But it is full of important insights into how the patriarchy robs men of pieces of themselves and womens’ roles in upholding and reinforcing the patriarchy. This is a book of deep love and empathy for the good men out there. I think it’s worth a read.